Author: WHT135-01
Last saved by: Marguerite Rodgers
Company: Hewlett-Packard Company

Minutes
Faculty Course Assessment Committee Meeting
November 5, 2012

The Faculty Course Assessment Committee convened its third meeting of the 2012-13 academic year in the third floor HSC conference room at 12:15 p.m. with the following members in attendance: Phil Ballard, Dean Inman, Dr. Carolyn Langston, Dr. Sandra Pugh, and Dr. Stephanie Tully-Dartez.  Cindy Meyer attended as a guest.

Dr. Pugh, the chairperson, called the meeting to order and acknowledged that not enough members were in attendance for a quorum but suggested going through the agenda items for information purposes without taking any action.  No one objected to this, so she reminded the group that the revised Statement of Purpose for General Education had been approved via email by the committee and subsequently approved by the Curriculum and Academic Standards Committees.  These revisions provide a foundation upon which the college can launch its Quality Initiative on critical thinking if the Higher Learning Commission approves it.

The second item on the agenda was a review of the functions of the Faculty Course Assessment Committee:

1.	Develop and review student assessment of learning activities.
2.	Collect, analyze and document patterns of evidence that demonstrate strengths and weaknesses of the assessment of student learning.
3.	Make recommendations from data collected by faculty as basis to improve student learning.
4.	Develop and review the content of faculty/course evaluation.
5.	Coordinate preparation of annual assessment with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee to be presented to the Academic Affairs and Student Services Council.
6	Make recommendations to the college’s leadership regarding strategic planning and budgeting that will impact student learning/teacher effectiveness.	

Dr. Pugh pointed out that the first function is worded inaccurately as it implies that the committee collects, analyzes, and documents patterns of evidence rather than the faculty members.  It was suggested that rephrasing the beginning of the statement to read “Review the collection, analysis, and documentation patterns of evidence . . .” would be a more accurate description of the committee’s duties in this regard.

The third item on the agenda, reviewing the contents of the Assessment Plan, was postponed until the next meeting.  At this time, Dr. Pugh invited Cindy Meyer to share information on vertical teaming with the group.  Ms. Meyer distributed the attached handout before explaining that her husband teaches advanced placement English at El Dorado High School, where the faculty has been applying the principles of vertical teams in support of the Common Core program and the state Frameworks.  She explained to the committee that vertical teaming is one practice model that could be applied in a higher education setting and used as a means of communication across the curriculum.  It encompasses all courses, from teachers who initiate academic material to teachers who teach courses immediately prior to earning a degree. Teachers work with each other to design class activities, assessment methods, and teaching initiatives to ensure all needed skills are covered – so that graduates are able to obtain employment in a particular field. Academic advisors, student support personnel, and administers can also assist in this process. With the collaborative design and increased communication, eventually individual student needs can also be addressed. For employees, this practice model can provide a professional learning community atmosphere.  Dr. Pugh thanked Ms. Meyer for sharing this information with the committee and noted it could be useful in SouthArk’s assessment process as well as in the development of new courses and programs.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:55 p.m.